Docstoc
EXCLUSIVE OFFER FOR DOCSTOC USERS
Try the all-new QuickBooks Online for FREE.  No credit card required.

Summer Enrichment Strategy - The David and Lucile Packard

Document Sample
Summer Enrichment Strategy - The David and Lucile Packard Powered By Docstoc
					                            Summer Enrichment Strategy




                         Children, Families, and Communities
                       The David and Lucile Packard Foundation
                                    December 2008



Table of Contents

Strategy Development ................................................................................................................. C-1 
Goal and Theory of Change ........................................................................................................ C-2 
Grantmaking Strategy ................................................................................................................. C-4 
Funding Plan ............................................................................................................................... C-7 
Evaluation Plan ........................................................................................................................... C-8 
Appendix 1: Advisory and Practitioner Committees ................................................................ C-10 
For some children, summertime means camp; visits to museums, parks, and libraries; and access
to a variety of fun and enriching activities. But for many low-income children, the reality of
summer looks nothing like this ideal. When the school doors close for the summer, too many
children are set loose to play on the streets unsupervised or, because of safety concerns, are
forced to stay indoors, isolated and lonely. Research shows that children who lack access to
enriching activities typically lose learning over the summer months and face a number of
behavioral risks. The proposed summer enrichment strategy aims to provide 50,000 low-income
children in 600 programs across California access to quality summer programs that engage them
in continuous learning and keep them safe and healthy. At the same time, the Foundation will
work with the field to establish what a high-quality summer enrichment program in California
looks like and help these 600 new and existing programs achieve that standard.


Strategy Development

At the June 2008 Board meeting, Trustees and staff discussed potential components of a
grantmaking strategy to expand summer enrichment opportunities for low-income children in
California. At its core, grantmaking would build on California’s recent large-scale expansion of
state-funded after-school programs and capitalize on the Foundation’s role in helping facilitate
this historic growth. Following discussion, the Trustees requested that the Children, Families,
and Communities program (CFC) develop a preliminary strategy for summer enrichment
grantmaking. Trustees also asked CFC to further explore key questions about program content,
geographic emphasis, and connections to current after-school grantees.

Over the summer, CFC engaged grantees and advisors to inform the development of this
preliminary strategy. CFC convened two committees1 that provided regular guidance and critical
advice. The Advisory Committee represented thought leaders and key stakeholders—including
representatives from the California Department of Education, the California after-school field,
organizations that provide children with opportunities for informal science learning and out-of-
door experiences including the Monterey Bay Aquarium; Foundation Trustee Katy Orr; and a
national expert on summer enrichment. The Practitioner Committee, composed of providers from
established and newer after-school programs, contributed learning and insight from their
experiences building and operating after-school and summer programs.

In addition, a grant to FowlerHoffman, a strategic consulting firm with extensive experience in
after-school, supported an investigation into the fundamental building blocks of a successful
investment to expand summer enrichment opportunities. FowlerHoffman also worked with
Foundation grantee the League of California Afterschool Providers to survey state-funded after-
school programs about their experiences and interests in summer programming.




1
    Please see Appendix 1 for complete rosters of the Advisory and Practitioner Committees.


                                                         C-1
An overarching theme emerged that shaped the preliminary strategy set forth in this
memorandum: the state of practice of school-based after-school programs providing quality
summer enrichment opportunities is still young. Therefore, the Foundation’s grantmaking should
focus upstream, stimulating the early development of programs and practice and building the
field’s knowledge and capacity for providing summer enrichment. The underlying strength that
California brings to this equation—its unique, $550 million annual commitment to state-funded
after-school programs through Proposition 49, the After School Education and Safety Program
(ASES)—remains the cornerstone upon which this work can build. Capitalizing on the assets of
its after-school subprogram, the Foundation can enter the early chapters of the summer
enrichment story and help shape its direction.

The case for engaging in this strategy development was set forth in the June docket and Board
discussion, which addressed the questions of “Why now?” and “Why Packard?” Therefore, those
elements will not be repeated here. The remainder of this memorandum outlines the essential
elements of the proposed strategy:
       The proposed goal and theory of change
       The proposed grantmaking strategies
       Preliminary plans for funding and evaluation


Goal and Theory of Change

Goal

CFC’s exploration over the last year revealed that summer learning as a field is underdeveloped
in California, both in terms of the availability of programs and the knowledge about content and
design of what constitutes a quality summer program. To help catalyze a process of
programmatic development of summer enrichment opportunities, the Advisory and Practitioner
Committees recommended that the Foundation work within target communities to increase
access to programs for low-income children while developing a system to define, build, and
sustain quality programs across these communities. Both committees also recommended that the
Foundation focus on fostering the development of quality summer programs that provide
opportunities for experiential learning, connection to the out-of-doors, physical activity,
integrated language arts, and linkages to after-school programs and the school year. Finally, the
Advisory and Practitioner Committees agreed that the Foundation’s investment can and should
build on California’s unprecedented commitment to state-funded after-school programs to
provide quality summer enrichment opportunities for low-income children in California.




                                               C-2
Taking up these recommendations, CFC recommends three goals for the summer enrichment
strategy:
      Help open or improve 600 summer programs in target communities across California,
       serving approximately 50,000 children annually. Thus 15% of the state-funded after-
       school programs would include a high-quality summer component.
      Through active and iterative support for these 600 programs, enrich their practice and
       help create a standard for high-quality summer enrichment in California.
      By the end of the Foundation’s seven-year investment, assure that educators, parents, and
       leaders from the target communities recognize summer enrichment programs as a critical
       intervention which the community will sustain.

Programs will build from existing ASES-funded after-school programs, which provide school-
based enrichment opportunities for low-income children during the after-school hours. Early
analysis demonstrates that existing ASES funds can provide a substantial proportion of the
operating funds required for this summer expansion effort. Grantmaking will provide target
communities with the assistance they need to develop and implement quality summer programs
that meet the particular needs of each community’s children and families. The proposed seven-
year summer enrichment strategy will support program growth at the community level and
provide a robust system to help build program capacity. At the end of the Foundation’s
investment, target communities will sustain quality summer programs by maximizing and
braiding available state, federal, and local resources that continue to support and nurture future
generations of children.

Theory of Change

Key to the theory of change is to maximize the resources, energy, and expertise of California’s
system of after-school programs. State-funded after-school programs have existing relationships
with children, parents, schools, and public and private funders; strong community partnerships; a
technical assistance system; and expertise in youth development and academic support. After-
school programs are also charged with keeping children safe and learning when school is out.
With additional expertise, program support, and funding, these programs can be the platform for
transforming the summer experiences of thousands of children throughout California.

The proposed grantmaking strategy focuses on investing in communities that exhibit interest and
readiness to expand access to quality summer enrichment opportunities (Strategy One: Target
Communities) and establishing systematic program support for defining quality and the
gathering and dissemination of knowledge and best practices (Strategy Two: Summer Practice
Consortium). Both of these strategies will be strengthened by philanthropic collaboration.




                                                C-3
Grantmaking Strategy

 Summer Enrichment Logic Model
    Strategies          Intermediate Outcomes        Long-term Outcomes         Ultimate Outcome
                                                                                 (Beyond 7 years)
                            Target
                            communities
                            access flexible
                            resources to                600 programs,
                            provide quality             serving 50,000
   Target                   programs                    children annually,
   Communities                                          are thriving and
                                                                                Expanded access
                                                        sustainable
                                                                                to quality summer
                            Target community                                    enrichment
                            leaders build a                                     programs for low-
                            network to                                          income children in
   Summer                   promote summer              Target communities      California
   Practice                                             and the field have
   Consortium                                           developed high-
                                                        quality standards for
                            Research and                summer enrichment
                            practice inform
                            quality programs

                                 Philanthropic Collaboration



Strategy One: Target Communities

Today 4,000 state-funded after-school programs operate in California communities ranging from
rural counties to large urban neighborhoods and cities. These programs run through the nine-
month school year and provide safe and academically-enriching activities for children during
after-school hours. In most communities, however, access to these enrichment opportunities ends
when the school doors close in June. A survey of state-funded after-school programs found that
most program staff believed that the children and families they serve lack access to quality
summer enrichment opportunities. The Practitioner Committee echoed this concern and
emphasized the critical need for learning and enrichment activities for children during the
summer months.

To address this pressing need, the proposed summer enrichment strategy will expand access for
low-income children in target communities to quality summer enrichment programs that build
upon and integrate with the existing state-funded after-school platform. With guidance from
Foundation-supported experts, educators and after-school leaders in target communities will
work together to develop a framework for quality summer enrichment programs that is tailored
to meet the specific needs of the children and families who need them most. Using this
framework, target communities will build partnerships and design plans to secure broad-based
funding to expand access to summer programs, including taking advantage of large, existing
federal and state public funding streams that can be focused on summer enrichment.


                                               C-4
The target communities strategy also aims to lift up and highlight the critical importance of
quality summer enrichment programs and, more broadly, to support local leaders who can
become champions for summer within and across communities. Grantmaking to target
communities will help expand local priorities to include ongoing investments in summer
enrichment, so that communities will successfully increase and sustain access to quality summer
programs beyond the Foundation’s investment.

Expanding Access in Target Communities

Grantmaking will not support direct service, but will catalyze summer program expansion in
target communities. Grants to target communities will help grantees develop strong partnerships
with schools and other community organizations, implement an intensive planning process to
develop a framework for expanding summer enrichment programs, and identify funding streams
and resources that can be used for summer. Despite the current state and national economic
crises, there are many existing resources that can be better utilized to support summer programs:
       ASES and 21st Century Community Learning Centers (CCLC)2 both allow at least some
        funding to be used for summer programming. Simple adjustments to these funding
        streams to make them more flexible could open up even more money for summer.
       Federal funding, like the USDA’s Simplified Summer Food Program and Supplemental
        Education Services in No Child Left Behind, is currently underused in California.
       Research and fund development assistance can help program providers in target
        communities identify local private funding streams and improve their skills at accessing
        them.
       Community planning efforts around starting and sustaining summer that are initiated
        because of this strategy could lead to more deliberate and steady allocation of local city
        and/or county funds for summer programs.

Request for Proposals (RFP)

An RFP process will guide the selection of up to 20 high-need communities that seek to expand
and improve existing summer programming and exhibit a level of readiness and capacity to do
so. A target “community” may be a dense urban neighborhood, a small city, or a rural county.
School districts’ boundaries will be a relevant factor in selecting community grantees, as districts
are often the lead agency that receives ASES funding.

Approximately 1,000 of the 4,000 state-funded after-school programs currently receive flexible,
supplemental funding that can be used for summer programming. Interviews with providers,
however, revealed that few of these programs were maximizing the supplemental funding to
provide quality summer enrichment opportunities, and some have even returned unused funding
to the State. Some of these already-funded programs will be selected as target community

2
  The 21st Century Community Learning Center (CCLC) program is a state-administered, federally-funded program
that provides grants to establish or expand before- and after-school programs for children in kindergarten through
12th grade. After-school programs in California receive approximately $175 million in CCLC funding each year.


                                                       C-5
grantees, as they can benefit from a deeper understanding of how quality summer programs are
developed and implemented.

Other key criteria for community selection will include:
      Geographic and regional diversity.
      Public and private support for summer among local business and civic leaders.
      Opportunity for innovation and partnerships in language arts and the out-of-doors.
      Opportunity to link to existing summer school or other district-run summer programs.
      Opportunity for philanthropic collaboration with local, California, and national funders.

Strategy Two: Summer Practice Consortium

To expand and improve summer enrichment opportunities, target communities will need
significant and ongoing expert assistance to define, develop, implement, grow, and sustain
quality programs. The Foundation’s investment will create a Summer Practice Consortium
(Consortium) to provide comprehensive expert help, and support to target communities, and
foster a cycle of learning about summer program design and practice. The Consortium will
comprise a small group of lead grantees that will include state and regional program
intermediaries; after-school and summer program practitioners; national education and youth
development organizations; and organizations with expertise in focus areas such as program
design, funding, language arts, and connecting children to the out-of-doors.

The Consortium will provide each target community comprehensive education, support, and
resources to identify and overcome challenges they may face in expanding access to quality
summer programs. Target communities will receive expert guidance in grant writing, program
design, staff training, and fund development, as well as in the content areas of language arts and
connecting children to the out-of-doors. Consortium grantees will also work side-by-side with
grantees in target communities to identify best practices and build partnerships with schools and
other community partners. Most importantly, the Consortium will work with target communities
to identify and access a broad and diverse base of funding for programs.

Furthermore, the Consortium will act as a central hub for the
                                                                                        Model 
learning and dissemination of innovative practices and will          Define  
                                                                                      innovative 
engage in research, leadership development, and                      quality
                                                                                       programs
communications to support the expansion of quality summer
                                                                             Summer
enrichment programs. The Consortium will work with key
                                                                             Practice
leaders from target communities in a coordinated and
                                                                            Consortium
collaborative space to define and, over time, refine quality
programming.                                                         Refine             Assess 
                                                                     quality           program 
                                                                    definition       effectiveness
The Consortium will design all of its activities to complement,
build from, and connect with existing after-school resources so
that summer enrichment is integrated into after-school and education planning, and so that the
summer system does not become a stand-alone entity.


                                               C-6
Synergy

Each of the two grantmaking strategies will draw from and strengthen the other. Grantees in
target communities will contribute to the Consortium as recipients and providers of knowledge
and expert assistance. The Consortium will act as a coordinating hub for information and
resources that leverages the entire field of summer practitioners, researchers, content experts, and
other stakeholders to best meet the needs of children and their families. At the end of the
Foundation’s investment, community grantees will have demonstrated successful practice across
600 summer enrichment programs, forged strong relationships within and across communities,
and become advocates to elevate summer enrichment programming as a critical intervention for
children to succeed in school and in life.

The Foundation has the opportunity to better support communities and children by partnering
with other funders who have an interest in summer enrichment or an adjacent area, such as
community safety, obesity, or closing the achievement gap. At the local level, engaging
community foundations, regional foundations, and private donors around the importance of
summer enrichment programs can help to sustain programs by building a broad base of
community support. At the state level, The California Endowment, the California Wellness
Foundation, and the James Irvine Foundation have all come to recognize the importance of
summer interventions for low-income children and the lack of quality summer programs that
exists in many communities. At the national level, the Atlantic Philanthropies, the Wallace
Foundation, and the Ford Foundation have also turned their attention to the role that summer
enrichment programs can play in closing the achievement gap for low-income children, and each
is contemplating working in California. By working with any or all these philanthropies, the
Foundation may be able to leverage its investment to achieve greater visibility and momentum to
expand quality summer enrichment opportunities for low-income children. Given these
significant opportunities, philanthropic collaboration undergirds the summer enrichment strategy,
as illustrated on the logic model on page C-4.


Funding Plan

The proposed funding plan envisions a seven-year period that spans start-up of key strategies,
community selection and planning, program implementation, program expansion, the emergence
of best practices and knowledge, and laying the groundwork for community commitment to
sustainable programs. Year one of the summer enrichment strategy will focus on planning,
building infrastructure to support the delivery of program development and design assistance,
and conducting an RFP process to guide the selection of target communities for investment. The
Foundation will make a small number of planning grants to jumpstart the planning process in
communities that are ready to open or improve summer enrichment programs in the following
year, the summer of 2010.

In 2009, the Foundation will also make grants to a small number of lead grantees for the Summer
Practice Consortium to develop key components of the strategy such as program design,
language arts, the out-of-doors, funding, and research. Together, the grantees that comprise the
Consortium will gather input from target communities to define the elements of quality summer
enrichment programs and develop a framework for building and improving programs. Grantees


                                                C-7
will link and embed the Consortium to the comprehensive technical assistance system that is
currently being designed for California’s state-funded after-school programs.

The RFP and initial planning grants will, by year two of the summer strategy, generate
approximately 10–15 grants to target communities across California to build new summer
enrichment programs or augment existing ones. CFC staff has identified several communities in
the Local Grantmaking area that are promising prospects to engage in the RFP process. Grantees
will include school districts and after-school program providers. The Summer Practice
Consortium will provide direct support to community grantees and act as a networking and
coalition-building facilitator in addition to guiding the work of the summer strategy. Only those
target communities that develop successful plans and demonstrate progress toward their goals
will receive additional funding and support to implement these plans and expand summer
enrichment programs for low-income children.

In year two, following the first round of community planning grants, the Foundation will make a
second round of planning grants to another approximately 10–15 target communities.
Consortium grantees will continue to develop and refine their activities and provide appropriate
expert support that meets the practical needs of programs on the ground. Grantmaking in years
three through six will focus on expanding access to quality summer programs in the target
communities. Efforts will continue in providing implementation support and building local
leadership to ensure that summer programming will be sustained beyond the Foundation’s
investment. A detailed exit strategy for year seven will guide the grantmaking in its final year.

Opportunities exist for collaborative investments at the local and state level that could leverage
the Foundation’s investments throughout the strategy and increase the likelihood of sustaining
summer enrichment programs beyond the grantmaking horizon.

On average, over the seven years, with different schedules of ramp-up and phase-out, the target
communities will receive approximately 60 percent of the grant funds, and the Summer Practice
Consortium will receive approximately 40 percent.


Evaluation Plan

The after-school subprogram has a comprehensive evaluation plan designed to assess the impact
of the Foundation’s grantmaking on the entire after-school sector in California. The evaluation
will afford an opportunity for program staff, grantees, and other philanthropies to learn from the
Foundation’s efforts to create effective systems that can sustain the after-school sector long after
the Foundation’s investments end.

With slight modification, the current after-school subprogram logic model and evaluation plan
will capture the learning and impact from the summer enrichment strategy.
Two components underlie the summer strategy and will become the basis of its evaluation:
      The impact that planning and program support may have on the development of quality
       summer programs building upon the state-funded after-school platform.



                                                C-8
      The effectiveness of local communities and after-school programs in planning and
       implementing quality summer enrichment programs that meet the specific needs of their
       communities.

Local communities will work with the Consortium to develop community-based outcomes that
measure success. One key question that will be deferred until the next stage of final strategy
development is the issue of individual child outcomes. Given the substantial research base that
demonstrates the positive impacts of quality summer enrichment programs for children, staff
currently believes that the unit of measurement for outcomes should be the growth and quality of
the programs rather than the impact on the specific children enrolled. However, no final decision
will be made on this issue until program advisors and evaluators are convened to help staff
resolve this challenging question.

Following approval of the proposed summer enrichment strategy, the after-school subprogram
staff will work jointly with the external evaluation team to articulate outcomes and identify
indicators and link them to the after-school evaluation. Key elements of the summer evaluation
plan to be refined include:
      Defining the questions and right sizing the evaluation to the level of investment.
      Selecting the evaluation design and methods that best address each question.
      Defining who should participate in the development of evaluation.
      Creating a timeline and sequence for data collection.
      Deciding how data will be collected, analyzed, and communicated.
      Deciding how real-time strategy modifications will be accommodated in the evaluation.
        

Ultimately, the after-school and summer enrichment evaluation plans will be one effort, and CFC
believes that the additional costs will be lower than if this evaluation were being designed and
conducted from scratch.




                                               C-9
Appendix 1: Advisory and Practitioner Committees

Advisors

Rocio Abundis Rodriguez, Region V Lead, Healthy Start and After School Partnerships
Steve Amick, League of California Afterschool Providers
Sandra Bass, The David and Lucile Packard Foundation
Jane Battey, Stewardship Council
Mike Brugh, California Department of Education
Lindsay Callahan, Central Valley Afterschool Foundation
Ron Fairchild, Center for Summer Learning, Johns Hopkins University
Steve Hagler, Stewardship Council
Gordon Jackson, California Department of Education
Katy Orr, The David and Lucile Packard Foundation
Jennifer Peck, Bay Area Partnership for Children and Youth
Cynthia Vernon, Monterey Bay Aquarium


Practitioners

Dana Fraticelli, Boys & Girls Clubs of Silicon Valley
Mary Hoshiko, YMCA of Santa Clara Valley
Greg Kepferle, Catholic Charities of Santa Clara County
Gary Moody, After-School All-Stars
Diane Ortiz, Hollister Youth Alliance
John Poch, After-School All-Stars, San Jose
Andee Press-Dawson, California Afterschool Network
Diego Sulaiman-Arancibia, After-School All-Stars, Los Angeles




                                              C-10

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:1
posted:4/12/2013
language:English
pages:11